Schools Are Good for Showing Off, Not for Learning

Suppose you are a student in a high school or college course and a magic fairy offers you the following choice: (1) You will learn the material in the course well, but will get a low grade (a D). Or (2) you will not learn the material at all, but will get a high grade (an A). Which would you choose? Be honest.

Nearly all students (except for a few rebels), would unhesitatingly choose Alternative 2. Students are rational beings. They know that school is about grades, not learning. If they ever need to know the material they can always learn it on their own, in a far more efficient way than they can at school. On the other hand, they can never erase that awful D. It would be stupid to choose Alternative 1. By the time they have reached high school, all students know that.

Schools are for showing off, not for learning. When we enroll our children in school, we enroll them into a never ending series of contests—to see who is best, who can get the highest grades, the highest scores on standardized tests, win the most honors, make it into the most advanced placement classes, get into the best colleges. We see those grades and hoops jumped through as measures not only of our children, but also of ourselves as parents. We find ways, subtly or not so subtly, to brag about them to our friends and relatives.

All this has nothing to do with learning, and, really, we all know it. We rarely even bother to think about what our children are actually learning in school; we only care about the grades. We, the parents, maybe even more than our kids, think it would be stupid for our kids to choose Alternative 1 over Alternative 2. We would forbid them from making that choice, if we could.

******

If schools were for learning rather than showing off, we would design them entirely differently. They would be places where people could follow their own interests, learn what they wanted to learn, try out various career paths, prepare themselves for the futures that they wanted. Everyone would be doing different things, at different times, so there would be no basis for comparison. People would learn to read when they wanted to learn to read, and we would help them do it if they wanted help. The focus would be on cooperation, not on competition. That’s what occurs at certain democratic schools, which are for learning, not for showing off, and such schools have proven remarkably effective.

******

One thing we know about learning is that it is inhibited by the kinds of pressures that we use at schools to motivate performance. Many psychological experiments have shown that contests and evaluations of all sorts lead those who already know well how to perform a task to do it even better than they otherwise would, but has the opposite effect on people who don’t know it so well.

For example, in one research study, conducted many years ago, psychologists observed people playing friendly games of 8-ball at the university’s pool hall.[1] At first they watched from a distance, so the players wouldn’t know they were being observed, and then they moved in close and observed deliberately, making it obvious that they were evaluating performance. The result was that those who were already good, when not observed closely, performed even better when they knew they were being evaluated; but those who were just beginners, learning how to play, performed worse when evaluated. The same has been found for many kinds of tasks—intellectual as well as athletic or manual. Showing off is facilitated by evaluation and contests, but such pressures inhibit learning. And yet, in our constant attempt (supposedly) to increase learning at school, we keep raising the pressure, and then wonder why it doesn’t work.

******

Much has been written about the education gap between children from economically richer and poorer families in the United States. It’s interesting to note that over the same period of time that pressures to perform well in school have been increasing, that gap has grown ever larger. In fact, one study (described here in the New York Times) showed that the gap in standardized test scores between the affluent and non-affluent grew by about 40 percent between the 1960s and today.

I’m sure that lots of factors figure into this education gap, but here’s one I’d like you to consider. Let’s suppose that children from economically better-off families learn, at home, much of what they are tested on in school. They perform well under the pressure of tests and the constant evaluation that occurs at school, because they already know a lot of it. They are used to this way of thinking. Let’s suppose that children from economically worse off families don’t learn so much, at home, of what they are tested on in school. They perform poorly on the tests, right from the beginning, because they don’t already know it. The high pressure of constant testing and evaluation—coupled with the embarrassment and shame of failure--makes it very difficult for them to learn at school what the others had already learned at home.

The failure may lead them to accept, fatalistically, a belief in their own stupidity, which may cause them to drop out of the whole process, mentally if not physically. In other words, I suggest, the high-pressure environment drives a wedge between those who already know and those who don’t already know, causing the gap to increase from year to year in school. And, as the pressure to perform well increases, the wedge widens.

*******

If we really want to reduce the education gap, we must design schools for learning, not for showing off.

*******

Source: Basic Books with permission

What do you think? Does this explanation of the increase in the education gap make sense, or not? This blog is a forum for discussion, and your stories, comments, and questions are valued and treated with respect by me and other readers. As always, I prefer if you post your comments and questions here rather than send them to me by private email. By putting them here, you share with other readers, not just with me. I read all comments and try to respond to all serious questions, if I feel I have something useful to say. Of course, if you have something to say that truly applies only to you and me, then send me an email.

Source: Basic Books with permission

For more about children’s natural ways of learning, and the conditions that best help them learn, see Free to Learn.

But we need to ask WHY the move toward more intense testing and other educational trends that "inhibit learning and drive a wedge between those who already know and those who don't." Could it be that this is exactly what the powers that be want to happen? Could it be that the "experts" driving education "reform" want a society in which people are divided by class? In which those who are well off believe that they have prevailed in a "meritocracy" and those who do not succeed believe they are not worthy? And in which nobody really learns anything except how to work hard to please his or her superiors, in the school or the corporation?

Personally, I don't think it's a malicious conspiracy. I think it's just lots of cultural inertia mixed with a bit of good-old-fashion stupidity. I see lots of pro-school parents who really just seem to think the direction school is going is for the best. They think more homework, more class time, larger school budgets, etc, are really going to help kids.

I think the dysfunction is fear driven. The intention is good, but like anything done from fear, it loses effectiveness. First budget cuts cut things that "appear" to not be important, but actually stimulate the brain towards learning, and the result is grades start slipping. Next kids are bored because the classroom is no longer stimulating, and they "fear" that the kids aren't getting enough discipline. From there, parents and school board members see children falling behind in testing and now the fear really kicks in. They double up on the areas they see where the students are falling behind, never considering that it may be because they have been so busy teaching, that they forgot the objective is for the kids to learn, and they eliminated the classes that promote the most effective learning (like the arts, music, and PE)and think starting earlier with these failed ideals will solve the problem.

Thank you for laying it out so well for everyone to see. I believe people are slowly waking up to the fact that fear based decisions simply won't work. We are entering a new paradigm and I'm so grateful for all the pioneers out there!

The problem is that the people making the laws and regulations concerning public education (requirements, funding, etc.) don't consult the experts like Peter Gray, or even the teachers in the schools, before passing legislation. They rely on constituent complaints and advice from the educational bureaucracy, who are primarily interested (whether they realize it or not) in keeping the status quo, to lead their efforts. It's much easier to add some testing requirements than to take on a total overhaul of the system. I like to believe that the lawmakers and bureaucrats mean well, that they are very concerned with educating our children; they are just misguided.

Absolutely agree! This isn't a conspiracy. Read about the No Child Left Behind act and read about how other countries, who's educational institutions FAR exceed ours, do things. Sure there are other countries that put tons of pressure on students, but there is something wrong with our system. I have seen it with personal experience.

I can echo that sentiment, Erica. Going through 12 years of school and then seeing the idiocy embedded in the universities I can say from personal experience that the people in it mean well, but the system does not incentivize them well enough to go an extra mile beyond the minimum required. It was a bit better in the private university I attended for two semesters but even they still rely on arbitrary grading mechanisms not connected to real learning but to rote memorization.
Today I am luckily in a community of people intent on growing, learning, and creating - this is one of the many pieces missing from our system today. It's called Exosphere (http://exosphe.re/) and we're people from all ages, backgrounds, and creeds working together to achieve individual aspirations and shared goals.
I believe our children should be integrated into normal life instead of segregated from it by visiting these confined spaces for most of their childhoods.

The real problem with our current education system is that the methods used are not in sync with human brain development. The brain matures at different rates between individuals. Brain develpment does not finalize until age 25 +/- 6 years!!!

It is no wonder that children blessed with a brain development rate on the high end of the normal curve could either excel or get bored.

Those at the lower end of the rate of brain development don't have a chance of keeping up with the average. It is not because they are inferior, they just need a little more time to catch up and can be as intelligent if not more intelligent than the so called geniuses described in the current education system.

There is another factor to discuss in this post and that is the Media. If the ideas presented in this post were applied, everyone would be a rock star. There would be no scientists.. So, the Media is just as much to blame for the sad state of our education system today.

I am for allowing a child to learn about what interests them without external influences, whether it be from peers or their teachers or the Media. Give them the tools to pursue what interests them (within reason, of course, we don't want toddlers making bombs).

I got interested in science from Mr. Wizard. Was given a chemistry set to play with and I was hooked.

We need good role models to follow, examples of what's possible and how to achieve that goal. Apprenticeships come to mind.

A child needs to have an identity very early in life. They have to know who they are. My father and uncle did this to me. Here's the story...

My father and uncle were talking to each other facing the street. I came out of the house and started walking towards them without them noticing I was coming. My dad said to my uncle.. "Do you know what I like about Ricky? He's a thinker." I felt so good about what I heard, I knew who I was... a thinker! From that day on (I was 4 at the time.) I walked around the block "THINKING". This idea and identity stuck with me my whole life. Children can be guided just by noticing their good traits and letting them know what they are.. say something like "He's a gentleman.", "She's honest." "He's thorough in what he does."... A string of identities that define a child will have lasting impacts on his/her life.

I agree with you completely. Also, speaking as both a teacher and a parent, we need to be very careful about what we say to and about children. ONE COMMENT (positive or negative) can change a person's life, just as you have described here.

I think if middle class parents are really honest about why they choose the schools/neighborhoods they do, they would admit that it's all about the class of kids they want their own hanging around with. The testing culture reinforces the class divide by dividing whole schools and districts into performing/not-performing.

Schools need students to fail and fail at least two years behind their peers in order to get additional funding. That funding is funneled mostly into AIG programs instead of into programs/approaches that really work to help failing students. This is legal because AIG students come under the exceptional students umbrella just like students who have learning differences such as dyslexia. All the money goes into one big pot. It is not as easy to get money from the state and federal government for children who are succeeding in school as it is to get it for children who are failing in school. The bulk of the money goes into the AIG programs b/c those are the students who raise a school's reputation. The struggling students aren't really helped. IEP's and 504's are written to help protect the schools from being sued. They sound good on paper but that is all. Nothing of real value is done to help those with learning differences learn how to capitalize on their strengths and shore up their weaknesses. The cash cows need to stay cash cows. There is no reason why dyslexics can't be identified and supported early in our schools. There is no reason why our schools can't use a more universally designed curriculum to teach reading. This information has been available for years. The government has even done studies that support things like the Orton-Gillingham approach and yet schools have never implemented this approach in K-2 classrooms. If they wait until third grade and let these kids fall two or more years behind their peers then the kids have emotional issues on top of learning differences and they will stay stuck in special ed classes a lot longer or at least have an IEP or 504 plan that follows them all the way to high school graduation ... KA-CHING! Schools are guaranteed a lot more government money that way for years and years. Dyslexics have been the targets of this conspiracy and discrimination for years and years and years. They are natural born creative geniuses, big picture thinkers and critical thinkers who are made to feel stupid so the schools can secure funding. My son was a cash cow for the system until I took him out of public school and put him in an environment where he could thrive! His public school records were held hostage until I agreed to sign an IEP for the next school year even though he was no longer enrolled. The school wanted the $4k+ they were getting on his head even though he was not going to be there. And trust me the years that he was there that money was never used to help him. He is grown man now and very successful but this is still happening to our dyslexic and other neuro-diverse children. IT MUST STOP!

As a long-time homeschool educator, grades rank low on my list of priorities. This doesn't mean I do not care about achievement. I care deeply - perhaps far more than school administrators. What I care most about is learning above all. Thus, mastery learning (learning until one achieves mastery of A-level work) is the goal. If this takes only a short period of time...great. If this takes a very long period of time...great. The end result is still the same - mastery. Mastery is important in critical thinking most of all.

The subjects studied are less important than the depth of learning behind them. Schools need to allow students to choose their paths and choose their interests. We should not march lock-step along a set curriculum. We should not keep similar age-groups forever linked together - learning is ageless. The basics of reading, writing, math, science/tech are crucial, but beyond that the sky is open and schools should support students in "finding themselves" and support learning for the sake of learning as children grow and develop at differing trajectories and with passionate individuality.

A neighbour questioned our decision again all week long, and that inspired me to write an article on homeschooling in South Africa, which I hope will be published on EzineArticles later today still.

See, in South Africa the problem is that there is a pass rate of 33% for important subjects such English, Math and Science. That makes a mockery of how school was done in our days. I find it amazing that people would encourage public school where minimum learning is encouraged.

Apart from that, homeschooling encourages whole learning, stuff that you can't find in text books, and where Life is the only test. You can't grade that.

This reminds me of a quote by Peter Thiel of Paypal that I, coincidentally, just blogged about yesterday.

"I think the single biggest problem that exists with schooling is that it ends up convincing most people that they’re mediocre and then the talented people get regrouped and are forced to compete with each other; and then most of them get convinced that they’re mediocre as well, and you sort of cycle and repeat, until people’s dreams and aspirations are badly beaten out of them over time."

In this case, the testing convinces people they're stupid and spirals downward from there.

I can confirm that this is what happened to me with Math. Our family moved a lot, so I ended up with some gaps by grade 4 that were not addressed until it was clear that I had no idea what was going on. The school got me a high school student who tutored me as a class project, who helped a little but when she gave a copy of her report to my parents, it started as basically "at first I thought she was not applying herself, but then realized she actually did not understand the basic concepts of math". I got really mad, since I interpreted that statement as "at first I thought she was lazy, but then I realized she was just dumb". I intentionally kept her report past the due date so she'd be late handing it in. I was a vindictive 9 year old.
I improved enough to graduate high school and go on to college, but still considered myself "not good at math".
Many years later, I now have (to my surprise) started homeschooling, and I want to make sure I'm always a few years ahead of my now grade 2 child. I started using Khan academy and finally discovered I wasn't bad at math; nobody had taught me! I might have chosen a completely different career path if I hadn't held this incorrect notion that I was not able to do math.
I don't want that for my kids. I want them to know they can master any subject they want, no matter how long it takes.

I think there is some truth to the article, but I think another thing is missed. There must be some method in place in order to determine whether a particular student is learning and improving in the subjects required. Previous generations complain that changing or even eliminating the grading scale so that people who aren't learning still get their feel-good pat on the back hurts learning overall because, as it was so well-put in the movie The Incredibles, we keep coming up with new ways to celebrate mediocrity while those who truly have an amazing talent or ability get shoved aside and scorned for out-shining the rest(paraphrasing).

Clearly, people don't like it when somebody else's success makes them look bad; it takes away one's bragging rights when somebody else is better, and some people rely heavily on being able to inflate their own successes to impress others. This is especially true when, for example, a guy wants to woo a girl by telling her how special he is. If he doesn't really have that much about himself to offer, it is that much harder for him to win her interest. Some people, when faced with this reality, become adept at the art of deceit.

As a home schooling parent, I think learning should be measured individually, the student being compared and competing not against other students but against his/her own record. But measuring progress is something that is difficult in the public school setting because they have to keep track of so many students all at the same time. Perhaps if kids didn't have a new teacher every year, the teacher might actually be able to have a more accurate perspective on whether a particular student is making any progress or maybe needs some extra help. There would still be some problems with such a system due to the more transient nature of our current society, but at least it might be an improvement, and the advent of online education can help close the gap.

Same teacher throughout the school life, that's actually a good idea, but same person may not be able to teach all the classes. Instead what we can have and I think we are having, is the mentor system, which is sometimes followed in colleges and hostels where new batch/students would be assigned mentors who can help/guide them through their journey/learning/stay.

I think that you can be an involved parent and make the best of every educational situation. If you get involved and do what it takes to make sure your child is getting the best education possible then you can make any school situation profitable. That being said sometimes it is necessary to supplement at home, if you feel they aren't grasping something at school.
Be Involved

As a widow raising two kids by myself, the school system has failed my kids. I was very involved in their education, I had homeschooled them in their first couple years before my husband died. Then when I had to go to work outside the home (I had been a freelance writer) the struggles we endured were horrendous. My son was right on the border in testing for gifted and talented so both kids went to a regular city school. I then gradually had them both accepted into an "honors" school, but there they were faced with social challenges which I could not overcome. Their "peers" clearly made their superior financial and social positions felt and the school was not nearly so welcoming for me, and in my efforts to stabilize financially my time availability was decreased. The system fed into situations that were so overwhelming they almost tore my family apart completely. Somehow I found my way through the emotional turmoil, but have pulled my son out of school. My daughter will be getting her GED, and I expect to be teaching adults GED classes very soon. There is plenty of work in that field since in my city, we graduate less than half of our students.

When my kids had first entered school I met all their teachers, I went to PTA meetings where the teachers showed themselves to be mostly clueless as to how to relate to adults, instead, treating us like one of their "classes" to be talked down to. I took on a position as a parent liaison at the school to try to help bridge the gap between parents and teachers. This was difficult because we have a huge immigrant population, particularly at the school my kids attended initially. The funding for that role was cut, so I began going in as a Junior Achievement volunteer. My son was repeatedly coming up against teachers who were claiming he was a problem, until I would come in and show them how to manage him. He was too bright so he got bored. If they put him in a responsible position where he could help other kids, he rose to the occasion. When the demands of my work kept me from going in to volunteer, he began going in the school in the morning when I dropped him off, and walking right back out the back door, skipping school. I had to take time off work and go in and talk with the teachers and principal. They did not take any responsibility for the fact that he had walked back out after I had watched him walk in. I had to put him on the spot and drive my point home with him. The teacher spent the rest of the year telling him he did not stand a chance at the "honors" school he was accepted to go into the following year.

If the teachers would even try to understand, appreciate and work with parents, it would still not be a great system. The point of the article is completely correct. It is beyond absurd to make some kids take much longer to complete a course than they need to, while other kids continue to struggle with the material. Learning, which should be a joy, is made painful for everyone, the adept students, the struggling students, the teachers and parents. Who wins in our current system? Society is certainly not any better for it.

I feel for you. My mom raised three of us by herself when my father died when I was 5. I was the youngest of the 3.

Things were much less complicated back then and in a sense getting an education where I lived was easier. Starting in middle school you chose either an academic or trade track.

I will be retiring from teaching soon and I feel as you do. Some places everything is a competition to look good so those people can feel good about themselves. I have been spoken to as an equal by parents and spoken down to by parents.

I teach special education which is tough in itself, especially since they now require these children who are not on grade level in reading and math to pass all state exams that are on grade level.

I don't care if it is No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, or slow down to flop, the education system is broken and until society and politicians admit that there will be plenty of kids whose self esteem suffers or they as your son did walk out the back door.

As a widow raising two kids by myself, the school system has failed my kids. I was very involved in their education, I had homeschooled them in their first couple years before my husband died. Then when I had to go to work outside the home (I had been a freelance writer) the struggles we endured were horrendous. My son was right on the border in testing for gifted and talented so both kids went to a regular city school. I then gradually had them both accepted into an "honors" school, but there they were faced with social challenges which I could not overcome. Their "peers" clearly made their superior financial and social positions felt and the school was not nearly so welcoming for me, and in my efforts to stabilize financially my time availability was decreased. The system fed into situations that were so overwhelming they almost tore my family apart completely. Somehow I found my way through the emotional turmoil, but have pulled my son out of school. My daughter will be getting her GED, and I expect to be teaching adults GED classes very soon. There is plenty of work in that field since in my city, we graduate less than half of our students.

When my kids had first entered school I met all their teachers, I went to PTA meetings where the teachers showed themselves to be mostly clueless as to how to relate to adults, instead, treating us like one of their "classes" to be talked down to. I took on a position as a parent liaison at the school to try to help bridge the gap between parents and teachers. This was difficult because we have a huge immigrant population, particularly at the school my kids attended initially. The funding for that role was cut, so I began going in as a Junior Achievement volunteer. My son was repeatedly coming up against teachers who were claiming he was a problem, until I would come in and show them how to manage him. He was too bright so he got bored. If they put him in a responsible position where he could help other kids, he rose to the occasion. When the demands of my work kept me from going in to volunteer, he began going in the school in the morning when I dropped him off, and walking right back out the back door, skipping school. I had to take time off work and go in and talk with the teachers and principal. They did not take any responsibility for the fact that he had walked back out after I had watched him walk in. I had to put him on the spot and drive my point home with him. The teacher spent the rest of the year telling him he did not stand a chance at the "honors" school he was accepted to go into the following year.

If the teachers would even try to understand, appreciate and work with parents, it would still not be a great system. The point of the article is completely correct. It is beyond absurd to make some kids take much longer to complete a course than they need to, while other kids continue to struggle with the material. Learning, which should be a joy, is made painful for everyone, the adept students, the struggling students, the teachers and parents. Who wins in our current system? Society is certainly not any better for it.

As a widow raising two kids by myself, the school system has failed my kids. I was very involved in their education, I had homeschooled them in their first couple years before my husband died. Then when I had to go to work outside the home (I had been a freelance writer) the struggles we endured were horrendous. My son was right on the border in testing for gifted and talented so both kids went to a regular city school. I then gradually had them both accepted into an "honors" school, but there they were faced with social challenges which I could not overcome. Their "peers" clearly made their superior financial and social positions felt and the school was not nearly so welcoming for me, and in my efforts to stabilize financially my time availability was decreased. The system fed into situations that were so overwhelming they almost tore my family apart completely. Somehow I found my way through the emotional turmoil, but have pulled my son out of school. My daughter will be getting her GED, and I expect to be teaching adults GED classes very soon. There is plenty of work in that field since in my city, we graduate less than half of our students.

When my kids had first entered school I met all their teachers, I went to PTA meetings where the teachers showed themselves to be mostly clueless as to how to relate to adults, instead, treating us like one of their "classes" to be talked down to. I took on a position as a parent liaison at the school to try to help bridge the gap between parents and teachers. This was difficult because we have a huge immigrant population, particularly at the school my kids attended initially. The funding for that role was cut, so I began going in as a Junior Achievement volunteer. My son was repeatedly coming up against teachers who were claiming he was a problem, until I would come in and show them how to manage him. He was too bright so he got bored. If they put him in a responsible position where he could help other kids, he rose to the occasion. When the demands of my work kept me from going in to volunteer, he began going in the school in the morning when I dropped him off, and walking right back out the back door, skipping school. I had to take time off work and go in and talk with the teachers and principal. They did not take any responsibility for the fact that he had walked back out after I had watched him walk in. I had to put him on the spot and drive my point home with him. The teacher spent the rest of the year telling him he did not stand a chance at the "honors" school he was accepted to go into the following year.

If the teachers would even try to understand, appreciate and work with parents, it would still not be a great system. The point of the article is completely correct. It is beyond absurd to make some kids take much longer to complete a course than they need to, while other kids continue to struggle with the material. Learning, which should be a joy, is made painful for everyone, the adept students, the struggling students, the teachers and parents. Who wins in our current system? Society is certainly not any better for it.

I was admiring your clear, objective description of the truth about school in complete agreement and since I already agreed, I was thinking about your other readers who may be encouraged to embrace this truth for the first time. Then along comes the fifth paragraph. You know you lost most of the potential new followers when you thrust the "learn what you wanted to learn" in on them so early and without context. That is an unrealistic jump and suggests all will be admitted into the academic club eventually if we let children follow their own personal interests in a nonjudgmental atmosphere. You know that can't happen, so continue from paragraph four with some realistic examples that will convince the unconvinced that the present system is broken.

I am happy with the 'learn what you want to learn' comment if taken in the sense of meaning 'whatever the student wishes to learn', as this is all encompassing. Some examples I could think of would include:
Reading
Wood Work
Chemistry
Sports and Physical movement
Medicine and Hygeine
Cooking
Geography
etc.

I think the point is that lots and lots of kids have absolutely zero interest in being "admitted into the academic club."

The goal isn't to make sure all kids will be admitted into a club that not all kids want to be a part of. The goal is to make sure that all kids are learning and thriving in their own, personal ways.

The kids who want to be in "the academic club" understand that it involves a good deal of temporary memorization and busy work, and they look at those activities like the rules of the club. And if that's what they want to do, if they feel like the environment of this club makes them happy, then more power to them.

The problem is, though, that the entire education system exists only for kids who want to be in that club. It ignores the millions of kids who have no interest in it and are, therefore, labeled as "failing," in one way or another.

Getting into the academic club should only be a concern for those who are interested in academics. Alas, academics and learning aren't the same thing.

I really enjoyed this article and am in total agreement with the writers assessnent.For anyone interested, the countries of pakistan and india already employ teaching methods that include learning at ones own pace as well as no grade systems.Upon research both of these countries and I am sure there are others have far superior results to grade based school systems.

I would agree with a lot of what's been said here, though I think people believing that conspiracy means people plotting behind closed doors to shackle the people is a misconstruing of the reality. This is all about control. The economic framework in which all this 'education' takes place, which is the MAIN determinant of human relations, whatever their intent, is what is driving policy, and if we have a series of institutions that are tasked with delivering AN OUTCOME, then this will be reflected in their methodology. The essential problem here is the dominant economic system, unless and until that is replaced with one that is planned based on the needs of the majority and not for the private gain of the minority we will not 'intellectually resolve' this issue. One might find minor reforms in the plethora of state machinations, but essentially government is there to administrate on behalf of the capitalist class and unless that relationship to the means of production is overturned then everything else can only ever be a sticking plaster.

I agree with Mick. It is well-known among social scientists who study education that the function of public schooling is to legitimate and reproduce the existing social and economic order, i.e. capitalism and it social division of labor. Nothing will change until capitalism changes Take a second to look up Pierre Bourdieu's Reproduction Theory and the writings of Antonio Gramsci, and you'll learn this is not Alex Jones conspiratainment, but widely accepted theory supported by research and evidence.

It's not true that there is no legitimate good model - google Sudbury schools. They are a radically different education model that has proven over and over that any student can be successful, whether gifted, learning disabled, or average, given a supportive environment and the power to choose their own destiny, kids will rise above our expectations and prove that they can and will succeed on their own terms and within their own definition of success.

Peter, Thank you for your article and I agree with you that the pressure created by a testing environment has significantly contributed to the "education gap". I also feel that the competitive nature of testing and grades is the reason bullying is at an all-time high in schools. And the whole attitude toward measurement or grading is wacky - what parent says to their child, "I want you to learn in school."? Instead they tell them, "I want you to get good grades." The message starts early - it's only the grades that are important.

I agree with this interpretation of what happens in conventional schooling. People learn best from personal interest. The school system is to inflexible to teach well. Students are expected to please their teachers by being obedient and repeating. As a student, I learned that my role had nearly nothing to do with actually learning. My job was to repeat and to repeat well. When given the freedom of making a small decision--you may pick from a handful of topics to write your paper on--the freedom to do even that was stripped by rules on paper length, form, or whether or not a famous person agreed with my conclusion. At one point, I recall being nearly tossed out of a class for refusing to sign a paper the teacher provided to all students requiring that they blame themselves for the failings of the school system and agree to finally learn in this new class. This wasn't because students had shown prior poor performance, but merely the opinion of the teacher that his students, who he had never met before, were lazy.

There are quite a few studies which show that a compelling contributor would be "family support", including one which found that the number of bookcases at home is a good predictor of academic success. Obviously, I don't believe in any magic attributes of bookcases which cause knowledge to be imparted to students. It's just that, if a family goes to the trouble of buying more than 2 book cases, they're most likely to fill them with books; and a family which goes to that trouble is a family which enjoys reading, and is very likely to a) impart that love to their children, and b) work in small ways to encourage their children to be better readers. Something as simple as listening closely to a single page, and imparting advice appropriate to that reading, can help a child move leagues ahead, especially if experiences of this sort happen every week.

Studies seem to show that home education goes a long way toward erasing socioeconomic differences. This makes sense; once one commits to home education, one commits to doing the same sort of thing all the time. It could be that most real learning happens during those one-on-one sessions with a concerned sibling or adult; that today's schools are mostly a place to show off what has been learned elsewhere.

Child-directed learning - which I prefer to "democratic schools" - works because the child wants it to work. When the child wants to learn to read, or do math, or create a play, or anything else within the resources of such schools, the child is supported, given those little nudges as needed, and free to discover and develop in all manner of wonderful ways.

Now this is so very interesting to me. I understand that children need certain basic subjects, reading, writing & maths to be able to communicate in our society. Though in saying that we have such talented & intelligent children & adults who learn in different ways & over different time periods. Schools in general are unfortunately about grades and do cause segregation. This is my opinion. I was never read to as a child, in fact my father was not for books and yet I love to read. Due to such diverse backgrounds in a parents life this does not mean that because they may not have been an "A" grade student that they are stupid. In turn they could find it difficult to keep up with the schooling system for their children and unfortuntely can then be categorized. There is no failure only feedback. If you have had a go and attempted to complete a particular test for example and learned something you have then not failed. You take those learnings and enhance and expand by applying them to moving forward in life positively. Some "A" grade students can be so mean and yes the "D" grade students can be also. Though in my experience some "A" grade students do it because they know big words and have a popularity status to protect the "D" or below grade students seem to feel that this is a survival technique. We need to nuture our children and help them to understand that they are very capable intelligent people in many various ways. Many successful people throughout history were homeschooled and encouraged to enrich their talents. Commonsense is not taught at school. Just my opinion and thank you for an intersting read.

I think it makes a lot of sense. Looking back on my academic career, it wasn't until much later in life that I ever had to 'learn' anything to be able to pass a test. And by then my confidence in my ability to ace tests was really high and so the cycle continues. That it can go the other way is completely reasonable to me.

I also agree with the person who commented that perhaps suggesting that we let everyone choose their own path will just cause those we are trying to convince to stop listening.

Test them, make them write essays, test them again. But only grade them against themselves. Against how far they had come last time you tested them. Why does anything else matter?